Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ROMs in archives act like they're missing #333

Open
intvsteve opened this issue Oct 17, 2019 · 3 comments
Open

ROMs in archives act like they're missing #333

intvsteve opened this issue Oct 17, 2019 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@intvsteve
Copy link
Owner

When you add a ROM to the ROM list while archive support is enabled, the next time you start LUI they act like they're missing, and the 'backup' copy of the ROM is used.

@intvsteve intvsteve self-assigned this Oct 17, 2019
@intvsteve intvsteve added the bug label Oct 17, 2019
@intvsteve
Copy link
Owner Author

Very low sev. This behavior is expected at this time.

When ROMs in archives are identified:

  • since archive access can be disabled, they are treated as "ephemeral" locations
  • ephemeral locations automatically make a copy in the 'ROMs' directory and stash an 'alternate' path
  • ROM list validation is currently unaware of ICompressedArchiveAccess

@intvsteve
Copy link
Owner Author

Have not done any investigation of performance of creating ICompressedArchiveAccess instances. E.g. if you have 500 ROMs would validating result in creating / disposing 500 archive accessor instances? And in some cases, e.g. nested archives, doing so may result in extracting temporary copies!

@intvsteve
Copy link
Owner Author

Another item to consider here is just how rigorous the validation is. Full validation implies actually computing CRCs of ROMs / .cfg files in archives. This likely means extracting to temporary file because there are scenarios in which seek access to the data stream may occur. Not all archive formats support seek access - hence the side effect of temporary extraction.

These considerations, in addition to memos holding onto StorageLocation means it's possible we'd be keeping many archive instances around. I.e. no 'memo' system for archives themselves is yet implemented.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant